Schola Europaea European School Brussels II

28
PANORAMA
of learning and whether or not the aim of
the learning process is the same now as
two hundred years ago.
Outside school, young people inhabit a rich
and complex learning environment which
they need to master. They use a wide range
of technology to do this. They exchange
key information, they search for knowledge
using a range of investigative techniques
and they often employ a form of ‘trial and
error’ or intuitive research to enhance their
range of skills. They are divergent. They
learn according to need and often in a style
which seems random in its nature but is
fast, effective and often collaborative rather
than competitive. If they are able to learn
some things so effectively in this manner,
should we examine why we continue to
use the same techniques as always in the
classroom, to use what are seemingly 19th
century solutions for the demands of the
21st century?
As a student I encountered examples of
so-called ‘Programmed Learning’, mainly
American in origin and promoting the idea
that there was a linear route to learning but
one which allowed different alternatives for
the learner. This is an attractive idea and
one which still surfaces today. In the 1960s,
this was in the form of specially constructed
‘books’, but recently I was involved in
a European School project called ‘iClass’
which explored the potential for using
the idea of personalized ‘programmed’
learning, but this time with the full force
of the micro-chip behind it. It was an
interesting experiment but on the whole
it didn’t provide immediate new answers
to the question of learning with new
technology because it had to be integrated
into a model of education which depended
upon having pre-determined goals and
mechanistic routes to their achievement.
In my second school during the mid 1970s,
I experimented with ‘Resource Based
Learning’ as it was called at the time, with a
group taking ‘O’ levels (the 16+ examination
in use at that time in the UK). I redefined
my role to become a ‘manager of learning’
and spent many hours writing task sheets
and assembling, filing and classifying an
enormous collection of newspaper articles,
textbook extracts, photographs, pamphlets
etc. Students negotiated their own route
through this with my help as facilitator.
By the end of the course they would have
covered all the ideas and be ready for their
exam. They would have been responsible
for their own learning. My nerve held until
the April before their June exam when
panic set in. Were they prepared? How did
I counter the ‘Mr. Johnson tells his class
all that they need to know’ brigade. In the
remaining three months I stood dutifully at
the blackboard and whistled through the
entire ‘O’ level course. Had I been wrong
in trying to use such a system of learning?
That is a good question. It is a question
which we have to face in today’s world. We
cannot deny that we have greatly increased
our capability to ‘do’ personalized, selfdirected
learning of a kind which, if it works,
will turn the student into the self-motivated,
self-evaluating ‘life-long learner’ that we
believe is needed in today’s world. If we
are going to use the new opportunities in
a different way we need to face a number
of questions.